Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER)
Volume 1 | Issue 1
Article 4
2011
Middle-and High-School Students’ Interest in
Nanoscale Science and Engineering Topics and
Phenomena
Kelly Hutchinson
George M. Bodner
Lynn Bryan
Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jpeer
Recommended Citation
Hutchinson, Kelly; Bodner, George M.; and Bryan, Lynn (2011) "Middle-and High-School Students’ Interest in Nanoscale Science
and Engineering Topics and Phenomena," Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER): Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 4.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1028
This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact epubs@purdue.edu for
additional information.
Available online at http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jpeer
Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 1:1 (2011) 30–39
Middle-­and High-­School Students’ Interest in Nanoscale
Science and Engineering Topics and Phenomena
Kelly Hutchinson, George M. Bodner, and Lynn Bryan
Purdue University
Abstract
Research has shown that an increase in students’ interest in science and engineering can have a positive effect on their achievement
(Baird, 1986; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; French, Immekus & Oakes, 2005; Schiefele, Krapp, & Winteler, 1992; Schwartz-­Bloom & Haplin,
2003; Weinburgh, 1995). Whereas many NSF-­funded programs in materials science and nanotechnology have included efforts to develop
curriculum materials for use in secondary or tertiary classrooms, relatively little work has been done to determine the topics that increase
students’ interest in science, engineering, and technology. As part of the work done by the National Center for Learning and Teaching in
Nanoscale Science and Engineering (NCLT, 2008), we examined middle-­school and high-­school students’ interest in topics and phenomena from the field of nanoscale science and engineering (NSE). Analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data suggested that students
were most interested in topics and phenomena that related to their everyday lives, were novel, and involved manipulatives. Conversely,
students were least interested in topics and phenomena they viewed as irrelevant to their lives, they believed they had learned previously,
and in which they were not actively involved. These results were used to inform the development of curriculum materials for middle school
and high school students aimed at enhancing the learning of NSE topics.
Keywords: nanoscale science and engineering education, nanotechnology, student interest, student motivation, middle-school, high-school
It is not surprising that motivational factors that influence an individual’s level of interest in a field or content domain
have been shown to play a crucial role in learning and development (Alexander, Jetton, & Kulikowich, 1995). Of potentially
greater significance is the fact that an individual’s level of interest has been found to be linked to deep-­level learning as opposed to surface-­level learning (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Schiefele, Krapp, & Winteler, 1992). Krapp, Hidi, and Renninger
(1992) noted that learners use more elaboration and make more connections between concepts as they process information
to which they are exposed when interest is triggered. Previous work therefore suggests that students’ attention and learning can be enhanced by situations that promote an increased level of interest, which will subsequently be referred to in this
article as “interest.”
Kelly Hutchinson, Department of Chemistry, Purdue University; George M. Bodner, Department of Chemistry and the School of Engineering Education,
Purdue University; Lynn Bryan, Departments of Physics and Curriculum & Instruction, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to George M. Bodner, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-­mail: gmbodner@
purdue.edu
This work was supported, in part, by the NSF-­funded National Central for Learning and Teaching (NCLT) in Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1028
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
A decline has been found in students’ interest in the science courses that provide the foundation upon which engineering curricula build as these students progress through
school and this decline in interest has been correlated with
an analogous decline in test performance and achievement
(Greenfield, 1997; Haussler & Hoffmann, 2002; James &
Smith, 1985; Simpson & Oliver, 1985). Conversely, Weinburgh (1995) found that as students became more interested in science, their achievement levels increased across
all ability levels. It is therefore incumbent upon those who
teach science to consider their students’ interest when designing lessons for the classroom. Thus, although teachers
may be required to teach particular concepts based upon
national, state, or local standards, they should contextualize lessons on these concepts so that they are tailored to the
interests of their students.
In the last several years, the use of examples from Nano­
scale Science and Engineering (NSE) has been proposed as
one means of increasing students’ interest in science (Chang,
2006; Foley & Hersam, 2006; Roco, 2003). Although NSE
topics have not been a part of traditional K-­12 science curricula, they may be of potential interest to students due to
the many interesting and novel phenomena that occur at the
nano level. They also provide the basis for building a link
between the material covered in introductory courses in science and the content of courses students who pursue careers
in engineering and technology will encounter.
Defining Interest
Interest has been defined as “a person’s interaction with
a specific class of tasks, objects, events, or ideas” (Krapp,
et al., 1992, p. 8). It is “a psychological state that, in later
phases of development, is also a predisposition to re-­engage
content that applies to in-­school and out-­of-­school learning and to young and old alike” (Hidi & Renninger, 2006,
p. 111). Researchers have divided interest into two forms:
individual or personal, and situational. Individual interest is
person-centered and lasts over an extended period of time,
Phase 1
31
whereas situational interest is situation-centered but has
the potential to develop into individual interest (Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002; Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Krapp, Hidi, &
­Renninger, 1992).
A four-phase model of the development of interest that
includes both individual and situational interest has been
proposed by Hidi and Renninger (2006). This model progresses from triggered situational interest to maintained situational interest to emerging individual interest and finally
to well developed individual interest as shown in Figure 1.
Characteristics that Influence Interest
Personal relevance has been found to have a positive effect on students’ interests. When students find that a topic
relates to their everyday life or to achieving a goal they have,
they are more apt to be interested in the topic being discussed
(Haussler & Hoffman, 2002; Sandoval, 1995; Schwartz-­
Bloom & Haplin, 2003). This increased interest has also
been shown to relate to better recall and enhanced learning
(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Hidi and Baird, 1986; Schiefele,
1999). Schwartz-­Bloom and Haplin (2003) found that when
high-school students are taught science concepts using material that is interesting and relevant to their own lives, significant gains in achievement can be made. This is consistent
with the suggestion that information to be learned should be
entrenched within contexts and applications that are meaningful and relevant to the students. The problem with achieving this goal is the difficulty of determining what topics are
actually relevant to students at a particular grade level.
Prior knowledge or background knowledge may also
have an effect on student interest in a topic (Bergin, 1999;
Haussler & Hofmann, 2002). At times, student interest is
increased by familiarity with a topic. Bergin (1999), however, has suggested that prior experience can also decrease
an individual’s interest in a topic.
The use of activities that involve physical manipulatives has been shown to have a positive effect on interest
and learning (Bergin, 1999; Haussler & Hoffmann, 2002;
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Triggered Situational
Maintained Situational
Emerging Individual
Well-developed Individual
InterestInterestInterestInterest
Defined as
Short-­term changes in Focused attention and
Beginning desire to
affective and cognitive persistence over time to an
re-­engage with particular
components
activity/task
topics over extended time
periods
Lasting predisposition to
re-­engage in a particular topic
Supported by
Self-­supported through
positive feelings, stored
knowledge, and curiosity
Self-­generated through positive
feelings and increased stored
knowledge
Value in a particular task that
reflects their interest
Long lasting interest for a
particular topic
Externally supported through
Externally supported through
group work, puzzles, meaningful tasks
computers
Initiated by
Surprising information, personal relevance
Project-­based learning,
cooperative group work, one-­on-­one tutoring
Figure 1. The four-phase model of interest development (Hidi & Renninger, 2006).
32
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
Stohr-­Hunt, 1996) because students become more engaged
in the topic. The more involved students become in the task
or topic, the higher their interest (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002;
Hidi & Baird, 1986; Schiefele, 1999).
Novelty has also been found to influence interest (Bergin, 1999; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Haussler & Hoffmann,
2002; Hidi & Baird, 1986; Schiefele, 1999). Prior work
suggests that people do not report an increase in interest if
the stimulus is too familiar to them, or if the stimulus is too
unfamiliar for them to understand (Bodner, 2001).
Methodology
gender and academic ability levels in science as determined
by the student’s science teacher. Approximately equal numbers of male and female students were interviewed. The
sample population was also divided into approximately
equal numbers of students who had been identified as low,
medium, or high achieving by their instructors. The source
of quotations in the remainder of the article will be identified using RHS, SHS, or UHS to identify students from
rural, suburban, or urban high schools, respectively, and
RMS, SMS, or UMS to indicate rural, suburban, or urban
middle schools, respectively. Students also will be identified as either male or female, and as low, medium, or high
achieving on the basis of their science teacher’s assessment.
Research Questions
Data Collection
This study was designed to investigate middle-school
and high-school science students’ levels of interest in a
variety of NSE phenomena and concepts. The following
research questions guided the design of the study, data collection, and the data analysis.
• What nano-­scale science/engineering/technology
topics and phenomena do students find the most
interesting and the least interesting?
• What are the characteristics of the nanoscale topics
and phenomena in which the students’ are or are not
interested?
Participants
Participants in this study were Midwestern students in
middle schools and high schools from predominantly white,
middle class, rural (n = 164) and suburban (n = 96) communities and from a culturally diverse urban community
(n = 156). Table 1 provides a portrait of the participant
demographics.
The high-school students in the rural community were
enrolled in Chemistry 1, Integrated Chemistry and Physics
(ICP), or Advanced Placement Chemistry courses that were
all taught by the same teacher. High-school students from
the suburban community were all enrolled in Chemistry 1
courses taught by the same instructor. The urban community high-school students were enrolled in Biology or ICP
courses taught by various instructors.
From this population, 40 students (12 rural, 11 suburban,
and 17 urban) were selected for interviews based on their
Table 1
Survey participants
Middle High
Male
Female
Total
Rural
74 90
Suburban 55 41
Urban
19137
63101
4056
76 80
164
96
156
Total
179237
416
148 268
The students were introduced to a variety of nanoscale
topics and phenomena through four manipulative activities and a series of nanoscale driving questions. A mixed-­
methods approach (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004;
Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998, 2003) was used to collect data.
Quantitative techniques enabled the first author to collect
survey data on interest from a large number of students,
while the qualitative techniques allowed for a more detailed, in-­depth follow-­up of the survey data.
Quantitative data were collected using a three-­
point
Likert-­scale survey developed to evaluate students’ interest
in a set of NSE topics and phenomena. The term “phenomena” was used in the survey in the sense of describing real-­
world objects, systems, or events in a variety of contexts
to make the key ideas plausible (Smith, Wiser, Anderson,
Krajcik, & Coppola, 2004). The survey asked students to
rate their level of interest as either not interested, kind of
interested, or very interested.
The survey covered four NSE manipulative activities
and a set of 11 driving questions designed to measure students’ interest in learning about NSE or nanotechnology
topics. The four manipulative activities that demonstrated
NSE phenomena involved a waterproof material, a hopping
magnet (Lorenz, Olson, Campbell, Lisenski, & Ellis, 1997),
changes in the color of nanoscale gold particles (Mc­Farland,
Haynes, Mirkin, Van Duyne, & Godwin, 2004), and the effect of a surfactant on the ease of stirring a mixture of zinc
oxide and water. These activities were designed as a context
in which to determine students’ interests in the phenomena, rather than to elicit student knowledge. The first author
therefore provided support during the activities, but no explanation of the science behind the activities. A description
of the four activities is given in Appendix A.
A “driving question” has been defined as a well-designed
question used in problem-based science that is elaborated,
explored, and answered by both students and their teacher
(Krajcik, Blumenfeld, Marx, & Soloway, 2000). Each of the
following driving questions used in this study is introduced
by a single term that will be employed in subsequent sections of this article when referring to these questions.
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
1. Atoms: How do we know atoms exist?
2. Penny: If a penny is made of tiny particles (atoms),
why doesn’t it fall apart?
3. Pencil: What do a pencil, a diamond ring, a car tire,
and charcoal have in common?
4. Gecko: How can a gecko walk upside-­down on the
ceiling?
5. Gold: When will gold no longer be the color gold?
6. Aspirin: How did aspirin stop my headache today and
my fever last week?
7. Machines: What kinds of machines are small enough
to fit inside a living cell?
8. Window: What can be done to keep a window clean,
making sure water and dirt do not stick?
9. Robot: How can we make DNA act like a robot?
10. Common: What do styrofoam, fog, milk, Jell-­O, latex
paint, and steel have in common?
11. CD: Why does a CD have so many colors on the
back? Do these colors have anything to do with the
music stored on the CD?
The students were not expected to answer the questions
on the survey; they were only asked to indicate the level of
their interest in learning and understanding the answers to
these questions.
Interviews
To further elucidate the results obtained from the responses to the quantitative survey, one-­on-­one interviews
were conducted with a subset of participants. These interviews were designed to elicit student discussions about why
they found particular topics and phenomena more interesting than others. The interviews explored the students’ interest level for each item and asked students whether they could
explain how the activities worked or whether they knew the
answer to the driving questions. Students were also asked
how they would change the activities and questions to make
them more interesting as well as how to increase interest in
their current science class. The interviews lasted between 20
and 40 minutes and were audiotaped and transcribed.
33
interest were identified based on common trends found in
the transcripts (Patton, 2002).
Results
Results of the analysis of the most interesting and least
interesting of the four activities and the 11 driving questions are discussed in this section. The themes that emerged
using the constant comparative method (Patton, 2002) are
also examined. An analysis is also presented of suggestions students made during the interviews for changing the
questions and activities to make them more interesting and
suggestions they offered for making their current science
course more interesting.
Students’ Selections of the Most Interesting Topics and
Phenomena
Overall, the students were most interested in the CD,
Gecko, and Machines questions, as shown by the data in
Figure 2. This was true for the total sample population for
all district types (rural, suburban, and urban) and for the
total sample population for both middle-­school and high-­
school students. When the data were analyzed by gender,
the same questions were judged as most interesting by the
males. Females, however, were more interested in the Aspirin question than the Machines question. Of the four manipulative activities, the students were more interested in the
Waterproof and Easy-­Stir activities than the Hopping Magnet and Changing Color activities across all district types,
across all grade levels, and across both genders.
Analysis of the interview data indicated that students
were more likely to be interested in activities or questions
if they involved: (1) real-world objects or events, (2) topics
that were viewed as novel, and (3) physical manipulatives
with which the students were actively involved.
Most Interesting Question
Data Analysis
The surveys were coded for level of interest in each phenomenon and each driving question. The mean score for
each phenomenon and driving question was calculated after
assigning a code of 1 to the response of “not interested,”
2 to “kind-­of interested,” and 3 to “very interested.” The
surveys were also analyzed by determining the percentage
of students selecting each driving question as their most or
least favorite question.
The interviews were analyzed qualitatively in order to
evaluate why students expressed a given level of interest.
Through the iterative process of the constant comparative
method, several emerging themes that governed student
Figure 2. Percentage of all students selecting each of the 11 driving questions as the most interesting question.
34
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
Interest Due to Relevance to Real-World Objects or Events
As can be seen in the following excepts from student
interviews, the students were interested in activities or
questions that triggered their curiosity because they were
relevant to their everyday lives, to societal issues, or to realworld objects or events:
The ones that I was interested in most . . . are the ones
that would actually affect my life and affect the lives of
others. Things that, like, I can apply to everyday life are
worth talking about. While the other things are things
that I already know or . . . they don’t matter so much.
(RHS, low male)
[Very interested in the Aspirin] because it’s something that I actually can relate to and how like we have
those problems and then like it goes away and we don’t
know why. (SHS, high female)
The students also responded favorably to questions or
activities that aligned with their personal interests, even
though the topic might not be interesting to other students,
as seen in the following quotes from the interview data.
[Most interested in Gecko] probably cause I like anything to do with animals. And I don’t know, geckos are
just cool like how they can stick to anything. Like he can
climb up a flat surface and he has toes, but evidently, his
toes are small enough that he can find something. Like it
kind of reminded me of like a mouse, like how do they
do that, you know? (RHS, high female)
[Most interested in CD] because I like technology and
you know I like to know how it works. I like to know
how a computer works and how you know CD and all
that works, just how it gets on the back of the CD and
how it’s encoded, how it’s read, and how it works. (SHS,
high male)
[Very interested in Window because] I thought that
was interesting cause I’d like to have that for my car, you
know. You have dirt sticking to it and then the water runs
on and you can’t see though it, whereas with that technology, you’d never have to wash it and that’d be nice.
So that’s why I liked that one. (RHS, mid-­high male)
Some students responded favorably to a particular
question because it sparked a sense of curiosity. This was
seen most often with the CD and Gecko questions, and
was often the result of a connection between the question
and previous personal experiences such as owning compact discs.
[Most interested in the CD] because I’ve actually wondered why the colors were on CD and I don’t know how
what’s stored on there and how they can do that or what
contributes to it at all. I’ve always actually wondered
[about] that myself. (RHS, low female)
[Most interested in the CD because] I listen to a lot
of CDs and so I’ve always wondered why there were a
whole bunch of different colors on the back on those,
so . . . (RMS, high male)
In general, when the activity or driving question related
to the students’ personal interest, general curiosity, or connection to their life, students felt that they would be more
apt to want to learn the answer to the driving question or
become more involved in the activity to discover an explanation for what was occurring.
Interest Due to Novelty
Students expressed an interest in questions that were
perceived as novel primarily because they had not learned
about the phenomena prior to this study. This theme presented itself in contexts in which something was not only
new to the student, but also demonstrated something that
the student had not expected.
[Most interested in CD because] I don’t know very much
about that. I’ve never thought about that before. (RMS,
mid male)
[Most interested in Gecko because] I didn’t think an
animal could walk upside down on the ceiling. (SMS,
high female)
[Very interested in Waterproof] . . . ’cause like I’ve
never really heard of like waterproof thing—like you can
really waterproof something. And, I wanted to find out
like how, like how it happens. (SMS, low male)
The combination of novelty and surprise was often found
in comments from males who were interested in learning
more about the Machines question:
[Very interested in Machines because] yeah, I mean, to
me that was amazing how we can get like little cameras
that are small enough, and getting a picture, and what
they do with it, you know. It’s interesting; it’s really
amazing. It’s really interesting how they can get it to
work when it’s that small and deal with it, with the engine being so small, I find that really interesting. (RHS,
mid-­high male)
[Very interested in Machines] ‘cause something that
small, like cells are the smallest living organism and to
fit something, for humans to make something that small
with precision and put it inside of a living organism is
just kind of like mind-­boggling, cause it’s so small and I
would just like to know like what those machines would
do. (SHS, high male)
[Most interested in Machines because] it makes me
curious about. . . . It makes me curious about what kind
of . . . what kinds of machines are small enough to fit inside a living cell. Like, it makes me think, I guess. (RMS,
low male)
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
One student commented that she was not interested in
the Machines question because the topic was too novel for
her to understand. When discussing the Machines question,
she noted that she did not understand how it would work
because someone would need to operate the machine and
no one is small enough to do that.
[Not interested in Machines because] I didn’t think it
was fascinating, because if you get a machine in there,
then you’re gonna have to get as small as a living cell to
get in there to work it, to work the machine. (SHS, low
female)
In general, students stated that they were interested in
certain activities or driving questions because they did not
know that “something could do that.” However, the degree
to which the topic or phenomena is novel must be considered, as indicated by the student who found the Machines
question too novel for her to be interested in this topic. Our
results suggest that students must have some understanding of the topic or phenomena being presented in order to
stimulate their curiosity and desire to find out an answer.
Interest Due to Manipulative Nature of Activity
The students expressed particular interest in activities
that involved physical manipulatives in which they were
actively involved:
[Very interested in the Easy-­Stir because] I thought it was
cool because you actually, you actually did something to
the other side, so it’s more than them just putting water in
it, and keep on doing that, so . . . (RMS, high male)
Although the Changing Color activity was of low interest to many students, one student expressed his interest in
this activity because he was involved in creating an immediate outcome:
[Very interested in Changing Color because] it was immediate and that you could see and you changed something. And that was interesting a lot more than talking
about the theoretical things like the atoms of uh, and
what they’re composed of, and how much they weigh,
etc. And just it seems to me like one of those things for
using chemical reactions to produce different colors and
produce different reactions. (RHS, low male)
35
taking part, what was behind it. It was kind of like wow,
because I didn’t know that they had anything like that
and it let me find out. (RHS, high female)
It should be noted that many of the students who responded
that they were interested in the activities that involved physical manipulatives were from a district that, according to
the students, did not perform very many activities or experiments in science classes.
In general, students indicated that they were more interested in activities in which they were able to physically manipulate an object and in driving questions for which they
believed an activity could exist that would allow them to
manipulate an object. They felt that this manipulation allowed them to figure out the answers, which would enhance
their interest.
Students’ Selections of the Least Interesting
Questions/Activities
Overall, students were least interested in the Atoms and
Window questions and the Changing Color and Hopping
Magnet activities (see Figure 3). This was true for all groups
of students, regardless of district, grade, or gender. The students noted that they were least interested in these topics
and phenomena either because they did not find them relevant to everyday life, they already knew the answer, or they
were not actively engaged in manipulating materials during
the activity.
Uninteresting Because Not Relevant to “My”Life
The students were not interested in questions and activities that did not seem relevant to their individual lives or did
not trigger their personal interests. The Windows question,
for example, was not particularly interesting to the students
Least Interesting Question
Students also commented on being interested in activities, in general, because they enjoyed taking an active role
in the classroom:
[Interested in the activities because they were] very involved. I mean, you got to actually got to do something
and then see what was going on. Even if you didn’t really know what was going on behind, I mean what was
Figure 3. Percentage of all students selecting each of the 11 driving questions as the least interesting question.
36
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
because they did not believe that this new technology would
benefit them in their lives:
[Least interested in the Window because] umm . . . I
don’t know, I just felt that was kind of, I mean it would
be neat if we had windows where you don’t have to dust
them and clean them for fingerprints, but at the same
time, I could just get water and wash it off myself, so
I wouldn’t really need to know that, or feel the need to
explore that, I guess. (SHS, low-­mid male)
[Not interested in Window because] like what can be
done to a window to make sure water and dirt don’t stick,
it’d kind of be something to see, but it’s not really useful
to have something like that. (RHS, high female)
[Least interested in Machines because] I mean it’s interesting, but not as interesting as what I personally like
and stuff like that. (RMS, low female)
Overall, students were not interested in a topic or phenomenon if they did not find it relevant to real-world objects
or events, to their daily lives, or to something they would
encounter in the future. The less a topic or phenomenon
was viewed as being related to everyday life, the less the
students were interested in discovering an explanation of an
activity or an answer to a driving question.
Uninteresting Because I Already Knew the Answer
The students were not interested in questions or activities in which they believed they already knew an answer,
or had been taught the answer to the question previously.
This category also contained statements by students believing the question or activity was an “old type” of science,
rather than something that was new or novel. This became
particularly evident in the reasons that students provided for
why they were not interested in the topic of Atoms.
[Not interested in Atoms because] I think it’s just because since I’ve sat in Chemistry class and we’ve talked
about atoms and atoms and atoms, just after talking
about them for so long, and then doing labs and discoveries with them; not too fond of them. (SHS, low
female)
[Not interested in Atoms because] umm, last year we
did a whole thing on atoms and I just thought, you know,
I already know that atoms exist. I know mostly a lot of
stuff about those, so, I just didn’t find anything exciting
about it. (RMS, high male)
[Least interested in Atoms], yeah, ‘cause you kinda
just know they’re there. So it’s not, it’s not like umm,
oh, what does everything mean. You just kind of learn so
that, and it’s not really that exciting because you know
they’re there and what they do. (RMS, mid female)
[Not interested in the Waterproof because] well, I
pretty much already know how that works, kinda. (RHS,
mid male)
In general, the students’ level of interest declined when
they believed they had heard the information before and were
not interested in learning about it again or exploring it in
more detail. The more the students felt they knew about a
topic, the less interested they were in exploring the topic in
more detail. A fine line seemed to exist between knowing just
enough information for the students to want to learn more,
and students believing that they already know the information they needed, in which case they lost interest in the topic.
Uninteresting Because I Am Not Very Involved
The students were not interested in activities in which
they perceived they would not be directly involved, either
because they did not see much happening or because they
did not have much to do during the activity.
[Not interested in Changing Color because] I just didn’t
find it that interesting ‘cause, I don’t know, it didn’t really do much, like it just kind of, like the color change.
(RMS, high female)
[Not interested in Changing Color because] it went
from a red to a like a purple or a little darker and, I don’t
know, it just didn’t seem like much happened. (RHS,
mid-­high male)
[Not interested in Changing Color because] well really all I saw was a color change and there’s a lot of different experiments that, you know, have a different color
change, so I wasn’t really sure what was going on, but I
just saw a color change. (SHS, high male)
[Not interested in Easy-­Stir] because all we had to do
was stir it. It wasn’t like . . . exciting. (RMS, low male)
Students who were not interested in the Changing Color activity expressed the opinion that the color change was not
exciting or interesting because it was not drastic. One student stated that although he was not exactly sure what was
going on, it was just another color change and he had seen
“lots of” experiments with color changes.
Students suggested that they would be more interested in
the activities that were completed during class if they had
been more involved in manipulating the materials being
used. They also indicated that they wanted to observe drastic changes rather than subtle changes during the activities.
More Interesting If . . .
During the interviews, the students often commented on
ways to make them more interested in the questions and
activities described in this study, or in their science class,
in general. Based on the results discussed so far, it is not
surprising that they called for topics that were more relevant
to their everyday life and involved more experimentation or
hands-­on activities.
They were specifically interested in everyday things that
were relevant to people in their age group.
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
[More interested in the questions if you] work them so
like I could interact with them in everyday life that I do
as a normal, however you define normal, human being.
Like, put that into my everyday life then I might be a
little bit more interested in it . . . the more (questions)
relate to our everyday life, the more we’re gonna be
willing to pay attention and learn about them cause we
can interact with it more than just going to class, sitting
in class, and doing homework, like we can put it to our
lives. (SHS, mid-­low male)
[More interested if you] basically just relate it more
to like our age and like things that we know. (SHS, high
female)
[More interested in science if] umm, I’d like to see,
it annoys me about all the stuff we talk about, like the
electrons and stuff, it all seems so flimsy, so theoretical,
that like and umm, and I think I’d like to see a lot more
of the practical application of chemistry. Like what you
can use to advance your life. (RHS, low male)
The students also noted that they were more interested
in learning about topics when they were able to see and
interact with the phenomena, through experimentation or
­hands-­on activities, rather than just talking about the topic
and doing mathematical problems.
I don’t know, I like hands-­on stuff, so maybe if we did
a little more like got deeper into the subjects and you
know tested out what the different components or whatever, that might be fun. (SHS, low-­mid male)
lots of labs that actually apply to what we’re really
doing and that aren’t very time consuming. . . . It’s kind
of learning from all the class work and actually get to
see. There’s a lot that are involved in labs too. Like you
have to read and follow directions, and it gets you thinking more, than like homework, or whatever when you
just tune out. Like the hope is, I want to find out what
happens and I’ve got to do it in order to find out what
happens. (RHS, high female)
The students expressed the belief that there would be more
thinking and learning if the amount of experimentation were
increased because they would be active learners who would
be more involved in figuring out what is actually happening
rather than passive learners who were being told the answer.
37
The students in this study were more interested in NSE-­
related activities and questions if and when they were able
to see a connection to their personal interests or to their
every­day lives. They believed that relating topics, in general, to their everyday lives would significantly increase
their interest in their current science courses. This result
is consistent with prior work that suggests a relationship
between the extent to which students can relate to a topic
and their interest in and willingness to learn material being
presented (Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Haussler & Hoffmann,
2002; Sandoval, 1995; Schwartz-­Bloom & Haplin, 2003).
Our results suggest that contextualization, which places
material to be learned within the context of the students’
everyday life, personal interests, and/or general curiosity,
can lead to an increase in the students’ interest in learning.
Whereas prior work has emphasized the role that examples from everyday life can play in increasing student interest in a topic (Haussler & Hoffman, 2001; Sandoval, 1995;
Schwartz-Bloom & Haplin, 2003), the results obtained with
the Gecko driving question suggest that enhanced student
interest can be achieved using examples of real-world objects or events that are by no means part of the everyday life
of the students we interviewed.
Assertion # 2: Students Are Interested in Topics They
Perceive as Novel, Rather than Topics About Which They
Have Prior Knowledge.
The students in this study tended to be interested in NSE-­
related questions and activities that seemed to be novel to
them, which is consistent with research on characteristics that have an effect on students’ interest (Bergin, 1999;
­Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Haussler & Hoffmann, 2002; Hidi
& Baird, 1986; Schiefele, 1999). It should be noted, however, that novelty worked best when the topic was something
that was neither too familiar to the students nor too foreign.
This study suggests that sense of novelty is related to
prior knowledge. Students who perceived they possessed
significant prior knowledge of a topic were not interested
in further investigation of this topic. These results are consistent with the work of Bergin (1999), who argued that the
amount of interest a person will exhibit decreases as the
amount of prior experience with the topic increases. This
result is particularly relevant to the field of nanoscale science, engineering and technology because this is not likely
to be material with which students are overly familiar.
Discussion
Three major themes emerged in this study that characterize students’ interest in the introduction of NSE topics and
phenomena into the middle-school and high-school curricula.
Assertion #3: Students Are More Likely to Be Interested
in Topics They Experience and When They Are Actively
Involved in Thinking About and/or Visualizing the Topic
Using Physical Manipulatives.
Assertion #1: Students Are More Interested in Nanoscale
Science and Engineering Topics and Phenomena that Are
Relevant to Real-World Objects or Events Or to Their
Daily Lives.
The students in this study noted that they would be
more interested in questions, activities, and science classes
in general, if there were more hands-­on activities and experiments. The students did not want to just manipulate
38
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
­ aterials, however; they said that they would be more inm
terested in a topic if they had to think about it and visualize the process first-hand. The relationship between the
students’ level of interest and the extent to which they were
involved in a question or activity is consistent with prior
work that suggested a direct connection between the level
of students’ interest in a topic and the level of their activity (Hidi & Baird, 1986; Schiefele et al. 1992; Eccles &
­Wigfield, 2002).
Conclusion
In general, students in this study were more interested
in a question or activity if they viewed it as relevant to their
everyday life or to their personal interests. Questions or
activities that were novel also triggered interest for many
students who wanted to learn about something with which
they were unfamiliar or that might, at first glance, seem unlikely or impossible. Novelty was strongly related to prior
knowledge, inasmuch as the students were less interested in
learning about topics with which they were familiar from
prior classes. The students were also most interested in
hands-­on activities that required them to do more than just
follow directions or manipulate equipment or chemicals.
They wanted to have to think and figure out explanations,
as opposed to follow directions or to be told the answers in
a lecture. By taking these themes into account, curriculum
designers and teachers may be able to create curriculum
materials that increase student learning as a result of triggering student interest in the material.
The results of this study suggest that students’ interest in
science might be increased by incorporating examples from
NSE into the classroom. The advantage of NSE topics and
phenomena for increasing student interest might be due to
a combination of their prominence in today’s society in the
form of consumer products, advertising, popular media and
books; the perception that these topics are novel; and the
fact that students are unlikely to view these topics as having
been learned in previous coursework.
Appendix A
Description of Manipulative Activities
In the Waterproof Material activity, students compared
a traditional pair of khaki pants with a pair of Nanotex®
khaki pants. After liquid was poured on each pair, students
were asked to respond by describing what they saw. They
observed that the old pair of pants absorbed the liquid, while
the Nanotex® pants repelled the liquid.
In the Hopping Magnet activity, one side of a flat refrigerator magnet was cut off, and then dragged across a larger
magnet in two directions. The students then cut a piece of
the refrigerator magnet off the bottom and dragged it across
the larger magnet in two directions. The students were
asked to describe what they observed. They then dragged
the piece from the bottom of the refrigerator across the
larger magnet in a third direction to have the piece of refrigerator magnet “hop.”
In the Color Changing activity, students were given a
vial that contained 13 nm gold nanoparticles in an aqueous
solution. They were then asked how they could change the
color of this red solution. About 2 mL of water was added
to the vial by the students, which produced no change in
the color of the solution. The students then added sodium
chloride to the solution, which changed the color of the gold
nanoparticles from red to blue.
In the Easy-­Stir activity, students were given a small
amount of zinc oxide powder in a paper cup and asked
to figure out how to make it look like paint. The students
added about 2–3 mL of water to the cup and stirred to form
a “clumpy” suspension. Half of the students then added 6
more drops of water, while the other students added 3 drops
of the surfactant Darvan C-­N. Students who added more
water saw no change, while those who added the surfactant were able to make a suspension that looked more like
“paint.”
References
Alexander, P. A., Jetton, T. J., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1995). Interrelationship of knowledge, interest, and recall: Assessing a model of domain
learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 559–575.
Bergin, D. A. (1999). Influences on classroom interest. Educational Psychologist, 34(2), 87–98.
Bodner, G. M. (2001). Why lecture demonstrations are “exocharmic” for
both students and their instructors, University Chemistry Education,
5, 1–5.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The
case of constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Super­vision and Curriculum Development.
Chang, R. P. H. (2006). A call for nanoscience education. Nanotoday, 1(2),
6–7.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and
goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.
Foley, E. T., & Hersam, M. C. (2006). Assessing the need for nanotechnology education reform in the United States. Nanotechnology Law &
Business, 3, 467–484.
French, B. F., Immekus, J. C., & Oakes, W. C. (2005). An examination of
indicators of engineering students’ success and persistence. Journal of
Engineering Education, 94, 419–425.
Greenfield, T. A. (1997). Gender-­and grade-­level differences in science
interest and participation. Science Education, 81, 259–276.
Haussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2002). An intervention study to enhance
girls’ interest, self-­concept, and achievement in physics classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 870–888.
Hidi, S., & Baird, W. (1986). Interestingness—A neglected variable in discourse processing. Cognitive Science, 10, 179–194.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-­phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.
James, R. K., & Smith, S. (1985). Alienation of students from science in
grades 4-­12. Science Education, 69, 39–45.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research:
A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher,
33(7), 14–26.
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional,
curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry:
K. Hutchinson, G. Bodner, L. Bryan / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research
Science learning and teaching (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.
Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning, and
development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The
role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum
Lorenz, J. K., Olson, J. A., Campbell, D. J., Lisensky, G. C., & Ellis, A. B.
(1997). A refrigerator magnet analog of scanning-­probe microscopy.
Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 1032A–1032B.
McFarland, A. D., Haynes, C. L., Mirkin, C. A., Van Duyne, R. P., & Godwin, H. A. (2004). Color my nanoworld. Journal of Chemical Education, 81, 544A-­544B.
NCLT. (2008). National Center for Learning and Teaching in Nanoscale
Science and Engineering. Retrieved from http://www.nclt.us/.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Roco, M. C. (2003). Converging science and technology at the nanoscale:
Opportunities for education and training,” Nature Biotechnology, 21,
1247–1249.
Sandoval, J. (1995). Teaching in subject matter areas: Science. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 355–374.
Schiefele, U., Krapp, A., & Winteler, A. (1992). Interest as a predictor of academic achievement: A meta-­analysis of research, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39
Schwartz-­Bloom, R. D., & Halpin, M. J. (2003). Integrating pharmacology
topics in high school biology and chemistry classes improves performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 922–938.
Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1985). Attitude toward science and
achievement motivation profiles of male and female science students
in grades six through ten. Science Education, 69, 511–525.
Smith, C, Wiser, M., Anderson, C. W., Krajcik, J., & Coppola, B. (2004).
Implications of research on children’s learning for assessment: Matter
and atomic molecular theory. Paper commissioned by the Committee
on Test Design for K-­12 Science Achievement Center for Education,
National Research Council.
Stohr-­Hunt, P. M. (1996). An analysis of frequency of hands-­on experience
and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33,
101–109.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining
qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-­analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 32, 387–398.